When Wisconsin walleye anglers take to the waters Saturday, odds are they'll catch fewer fish than they did 20 years ago.

Because there are, in many waters, fewer walleye for the taking.

But the state is doing something about it: A bold plan to spend millions of dollars to beef up its stocking infrastructure, the size of the fish stocked and, officials hope, the populations of the state's most popular fish.

It's official title is the unsexy "Wisconsin Walleye Initiative," but a leading state wildlife official says it's akin to a fisheries version of the Apollo space program that put a man on the moon in a matter of years.

"That's not an overstatement," said Ron Bruch, statewide fisheries planning coordinator for the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. "We've never done anything like this before. We're not sure anyone has. We're not doing this on a few lakes. We're doing this on a landscape scale."

In its essence, the plan calls for a shift from stocking "small fingerlings" -- walleyes less than 2 inches -- to "large fingerlings," which can be as large as 8 inches.

"If you talk to any hatcheries guy, they'll tell you 'the bigger the better,' " Bruch said. "And we've studies to support that."

It's a rare stocking that sees more than 6 percent of small fingerlings survive into their first year. But 21 percent of large fingerlings make it.

Yet small fingerlings are the backbone of most hatchery programs, including Wisconsin's, because they cost so much less. It costs Wisconsin about 42 cents to raise a small fingerling; that price jumps to $2.45 for each large fingerling.

The reason? "You've gotta feed all those fish, and they eat a lot," Bruch said. "We are really into buying bait right now."

In recent years, the DNR raised about 40,000 large fingerlings yearly. By 2016, the number could be more than 600,000.

If you do the math, Bruch said, stocking the larger fish is actually more cost-effective, but the up-front costs have always been too high for the DNR.

Minnesota went through a similar program -- the Accelerated Walleye Program -- more than a decade ago. Over the past 15 years, the average number of walleye fingerlings stocked in Minnesota waters is 2.5 million, according to Minnesota officials.

The program, announced last year by Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and approved by state lawmakers, includes $8.2 million for infrastructure improvements and $1.3 million annually for the next two years for operating costs. Unlike Minnesota, where fish are raised in small natural prairie lakes, Wisconsin raises all its stocked walleyes in man-made, state-owned hatcheries. Much of the $8 million is paying to essentially dig new ponds or resurrect old ones that have been drained and grown over years ago.

Another $2 million is available for private, municipal and tribal hatcheries to similarly increase their capacity, and another $500,000 can be spent to buy walleye from private hatcheries.

The money is a mix of proceeds from fishing license fees -- the traditional source for stocking programs throughout the country -- and money from the state's General Purpose Revenue Fund. The use of general tax dollars to grow fish illustrates both the political value of walleye in Wisconsin as well as the scope of the problem.

Biologists aren't sure why walleye stocks are declining in many lakes in Wisconsin.

In a number of lakes in northwestern Wisconsin, the balance of power appears to be shifting from walleye to largemouth bass, a phenomenon that could be tied to the warming climate, decades of mostly catch-and-release bass fishing, or other factors.

What it's not the result of, Bruch and other DNR leaders say, is American Indian tribal spearing of fish -- but there's little question that's a factor in the politics.

In recent years, Chippewa tribes, which have court-affirmed treaty rights to spear fish, have increased their claims. However, DNR and tribal data shows the tribal harvests have often fell well short of their claims, and tribal members kill far fewer fish than nontribal members.

"It appears that exploitation -- tribal and/or recreational harvest -- is not contributing to the downward trends we have seen in walleye populations in some of our traditional walleye waters," Bruch said.

Still, the possibility that tribal members might catch more fish has had real effects on fishing. Earlier this month, the DNR announced a list of lakes where limits on walleye are below the statewide five fish per day.

It contained 173 waters with one fish limits and 363 with two-fish limits.

Later in the season, after the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission has announced its actual harvest -- and presumably when that kill is a fraction of its declaration -- limits will be relaxed.

But the annual pre-Indian harvest restriction has become a fishing-opener reminder to Wisconsin anglers of the potential stress on a lake that tribal spearing could bring.

More robust walleye populations -- from the Walleye Initiative -- would lessen the tension -- because there will be more fish to go around.

"What drove this?" said Steve AveLallemant, fisheries supervisor for the northern third of the state. "You can say tribal issues or politics or whatever. But the point is that the money came in, and we had a plan, and now we've got this golden opportunity to do something we've never been able to do before."